MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043333467 · doi:10.7202/602615ar

Events, Time and the Simple Form

2009· article· en· W2043333467 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)VerbEvent (particle physics)Meaning (existential)LinguisticsSimple pastRepresentation (politics)Action (physics)Point (geometry)PsychologyHistoryComputer scienceEpistemologyMathematicsPhilosophyPolitical sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an attempt to discern more clearly the underlying or POTENTIAL meaning of the simple form of the English verb, described in Hirtle 1967 as 'perfective'. Vendler's widely accepted classification of events into ACCOMPLISHMENTS, ACHIEVEMENTS, ACTIVITIES, and STATES is examined from the point of view of the time necessarily contained between the beginning and end of any event, i.e. EVENT TIME as represented by the simple form. This examination justifies the well known dynamic/stative dichotomy by showing that event time is evoked in two different ways, that, in fact, the simple form has two ACTUAL significates. Further reflection on the difference between the two types thus expressed—developmental or action-like events and non-developmental or state-like events—leads to the conclusion that the simple form provides a representation of the time required to situate all the impressions involved in the notional or lexical import of the verb.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it